Help me decide between amp/bookshelves pairs

[kaungsel]

I am looking for a pair of bookshelves with an amp and it all came down to 2 choices.
I need a sound system mainly for playing music from ipod/iphone/computer
1) Marantz Sr5004 AMP $400 and Axiom M22 bookshelves $488 ($888 total)
http://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/MARSR5004/Marantz/SR5004-Dolby-TrueHD-PLIIz/dts-HD-MA-AV-Receiver/1.html
http://axiomaudio.com/m22.html
or
2) EMP E5bi package with amp/ 2 bookshelve speakers for $549 total. http://www.emptek.com/special_E5BiTubeCombo.php

Is there gonna be enough difference between these 2 to justify paying $300 more for the first one?
Does the EMP only play music or can I also hook it up to my tv?

 

[Seth=L]

The Marantz receiver is far more flexible in terms of connectivity and processing as well as output power. The little EMP amplifier is only 40 watts per channel.

 

[yepimonfire]

teac teac teac teac teac teac teac teac teac teac

don't worry, were going to get you help. its going to be ok

 

[yepimonfire]

The Marantz receiver is far more flexible in terms of connectivity and processing as well as output power. The little EMP amplifier is only 40 watts per channel.

nice post change. you $^#*@$&#....

 

[Seth=L]

teac teac teac teac teac teac teac teac teac teac

don't worry, were going to get you help. its going to be ok

I was just saying what everyone knows I'm thinking.

 

[Seth=L]

I would like to add that the EMP amplifier is a hybrid design. It has a tube preamp section accompanied by a solid state (probably class D in fact) for final output. It has limited connectivity (only 1 set of RCA inputs and 2 1/8" inputs). It weighs a very meager 8 pounds, lighter than my tiny Teac AG-H300 stereo receiver rated at 30 watts RMS x 2.

edit: I guess the EMP VT-40.2 utilizes a traditional class a/b design and power is supplied by the toroidal transformer. I'm still confused as to why it weighs only 8 pounds though. I guess the case must be the heatsink and the capacitors are tucked inside mounted horizontally. I'm still not impressed with it's greater than 80dB SNR, that's definitely audible noise. The Marantz's SNR rating is supposed to be 105dB, which is dramatically better than the EMP VT-40.2.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

I am looking for a pair of bookshelves with an amp and it all came down to 2 choices.
I need a sound system mainly for playing music from ipod/iphone/computer
1) Marantz Sr5004 AMP $400 and Axiom M22 bookshelves $488 ($888 total)
http://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/MARSR5004/Marantz/SR5004-Dolby-TrueHD-PLIIz/dts-HD-MA-AV-Receiver/1.html
http://axiomaudio.com/m22.html
or
2) EMP E5bi package with amp/ 2 bookshelve speakers for $549 total. http://www.emptek.com/special_E5BiTubeCombo.php

Is there gonna be enough difference between these 2 to justify paying $300 more for the first one?
Does the EMP only play music or can I also hook it up to my tv?

Is this going to be used only for music playback or home theater? If for music only, I would look at a stereo receiver or integrated amp -- you aren't going to need the features that Marantz offers just for music listening...

 

[kaungsel]

I would like to add that the EMP amplifier is a hybrid design. It has a tube preamp section accompanied by a solid state (probably class D in fact) for final output. It has limited connectivity (only 1 set of RCA inputs and 2 1/8" inputs). It weighs a very meager 8 pounds, lighter than my tiny Teac AG-H300 stereo receiver rated at 30 watts RMS x 2.

edit: I guess the EMP VT-40.2 utilizes a traditional class a/b design and power is supplied by the toroidal transformer. I'm still confused as to why it weighs only 8 pounds though. I guess the case must be the heatsink and the capacitors are tucked inside mounted horizontally. I'm still not impressed with it's greater than 80dB SNR, that's definitely audible noise. The Marantz's SNR rating is supposed to be 105dB, which is dramatically better than the EMP VT-40.2.

So Marantz + axiom m22 for the win?

 

[kaungsel]

Is this going to be used only for music playback or home theater? If for music only, I would look at a stereo receiver or integrated amp -- you aren't going to need the features that Marantz offers just for music listening...

I would be open to some stereo receiver or integrated amp. would you recommend any?
What's the difference between the integrated ones and Marantz SR5400?

 

[PearlcorderS701]

I would be open to some stereo receiver or integrated amp. would you recommend any?
What's the difference between the integrated ones and Marantz SR5400?

Well, let's go first things first...in what kind of application will this be used in? Are you only going to be using it for listening to music (2-channel)? For home theater (multichannel)? If just for music, you have three choices of ways to go: stereo receiver, integrated amp (basically a receiver without the tuner) or full blown "separates" which would include two-channel power amp, separate pre amp and whatever other devices you have (tuner, etc.). For stereo receivers, I wholeheartedly recommend what I picked up for my two channel system, the Onkyo TX-8555. A powerhouse that is built like a tank and sounds like a good integrated. But there are many other choices from Denon, Marantz and some others -- just stay away from Sony and low rent brands like Insignia and perhaps some Sherwood models. Furthermore, there aren't too many "super high end" stereo receiver offerings, if your budget is limitless, but there are some that approach high end...

For integrateds, the choices are nearly limitless throughout the audio landscape -- you have the popular NAD plus a plethora of brands up and down the budget scale. Onkyo makes a nice integrated, the A-9999, and Marantz makes a few as does Denon, who makes a $1200 or so model...but there are SO many more to choose from.

Oh, and to answer your question about the differences between the Marantz you are eyeballing and integrated amps: The Marantz is a receiver with onboard surround decoding for home theater plus a tuner -- integrated amps are used for two channel (i.e. music) applications and don't have surround decoding and such, plus they don't have onboard tuners. So if you're going for an integrated and radio is important to you, you need to get an outboard tuner. Further, it's generally felt that integrated amps, due to their "seriousness of purpose," usually "outperform" stereo receivers, and that may be true to a point, but I am getting wallops of performance from my Onkyo 8555.

 

[kaungsel]

Well, let's go first things first...in what kind of application will this be used in? Are you only going to be using it for listening to music (2-channel)? For home theater (multichannel)? If just for music, you have three choices of ways to go: stereo receiver, integrated amp (basically a receiver without the tuner) or full blown "separates" which would include two-channel power amp, separate pre amp and whatever other devices you have (tuner, etc.). For stereo receivers, I wholeheartedly recommend what I picked up for my two channel system, the Onkyo TX-8555. A powerhouse that is built like a tank and sounds like a good integrated. But there are many other choices from Denon, Marantz and some others -- just stay away from Sony and low rent brands like Insignia and perhaps some Sherwood models. Furthermore, there aren't too many "super high end" stereo receiver offerings, if your budget is limitless, but there are some that approach high end...

For integrateds, the choices are nearly limitless throughout the audio landscape -- you have the popular NAD plus a plethora of brands up and down the budget scale. Onkyo makes a nice integrated, the A-9999, and Marantz makes a few as does Denon, who makes a $1200 or so model...but there are SO many more to choose from.

Oh, and to answer your question about the differences between the Marantz you are eyeballing and integrated amps: The Marantz is a receiver with onboard surround decoding for home theater plus a tuner -- integrated amps are used for two channel (i.e. music) applications and don't have surround decoding and such, plus they don't have onboard tuners. So if you're going for an integrated and radio is important to you, you need to get an outboard tuner. Further, it's generally felt that integrated amps, due to their "seriousness of purpose," usually "outperform" stereo receivers, and that may be true to a point, but I am getting wallops of performance from my Onkyo 8555.

Onkyo tx-8555 with a pair of bookshelves also sounds good to me. Will I be able to pair this amplifier with the Axiom M22 or do you have another speakers that you can recommend?
Will I also be able to connect to a tv and my ipod at the same time with this amp? (I don't really mind not having a surround sound)

Also, since this is dedicated to music, will the sound quality be much better than the marantz?

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Onkyo tx-8555 with a pair of bookshelves also sounds good to me.

That's exactly what I'm running.

Will I be able to pair this amplifier with the Axiom M22 or do you have another speakers that you can recommend?

I don't have direct experience with those speakers, mainly Polk, but this amp section of the 8555 is pretty stout at 100 watts per channel, and would be okay powering just about any reasonable pair of speakers.

Will I also be able to connect to a tv and my ipod at the same time with this amp? (I don't really mind not having a surround sound)

The iPod I'm not sure of -- the TV definitely.

Also, since this is dedicated to music, will the sound quality be much better than the marantz?

Well, this has always been argued amongst audiophiles -- that is, the "sound quality" between surround receivers and dedicated stereo receivers...I will say this: Almost all modern surround receivers will sound just fine in their "stereo" modes, or "direct" modes, feeding a pair of speakers. I've run my surround receivers like that for years, forced to because one room had to be the home theater and music listening area. Now that I have a separate room for a dedicated music system, I wouldn't have bought anything but equipment specifically geared towards two channel (music) playback -- for example, stereo receivers, integrated amps or full blown separates. That said, I am not sure if the 8555 would sound "much better" in sound quality as you asked versus the Marantz you are considering, but if this is just for music, I wouldn't look at any surround receiver unless you are considering surround sound in that same room in the future.

Hope this helped.

 

[KEW]

Is this going to be used only for music playback or home theater? If for music only, I would look at a stereo receiver or integrated amp -- you aren't going to need the features that Marantz offers just for music listening...

I'll take the other side of this issue.
I don't disagree with anything Pearlcorder has said, but there are some counter-arguments to consider.
The economies of scale and popularity of AVR's is such that you get many many more features in an AVR for not much more money. However, these features may be totally worthless to you. I went with an AVR for my stereo system and these are the features that swayed my decision in that direction:

1) Will you use a subwoofer? -
While a typical stereo receiver has a subwoofer output, there is absolutely no bass management - the receiver is sending full range signal to your speakers and full range signal to your subwoofer. If you are running bookshelf speakers, it is nice if you can save them from trying to reproduce below ~80Hz.
The AVR will eliminate the low frequencies from the speakers and the high frequencies from the sub and the rate of rolloff is balanced between the two.

2) Would you like to put a second set of speakers out on the deck or in another room? -
Most AVR's offer a "zone b" feature where you can sacrifice a couple of surround speakers and hook up another pair of speakers. You have separate controls of the source and volume for the second pair of speakers via the remote control.

3) How good are your room acoustics? -
Most AVR's offer an EQ system which measures your room and compensates for peaks and valleys in the frequency response. In a good room this doesn't matter. In a poor room, it will help. In my case I wasn't sure how good my room was, but I knew treatments were out of the picture (WAF), so I played it safe by getting an AVR.

4) How much power do you need? -
Because an AVR is designed to power 5 or 7 speakers simultaneously, if you use it for only 2 channels, you end up with extra dynamic headroom. Does it matter? That depends on the efficiency of your speakers and how loud you listen.

So look at the price difference (I suggest looking at accessories4less for the best prices on Onkyo and Marantz refurbs, but suspect you are already there) and whether the factors above apply to you before you make a decision.

 

[kaungsel]

1) If I get the axiom M22's speakers, are they good enough already or will I need a subwoofer to go with it? I am not really in need of intense bass or anything.

2) I mmost likely don't need a second set on speakers in a different room.

3) What do you mean by my room's acoustics? I have no idea how to measure it lol

The price difference is about $220 between the marantz and Onkyo stereo amp

I'll take the other side of this issue.
I don't disagree with anything Pearlcorder has said, but there are some counter-arguments to consider.
The economies of scale and popularity of AVR's is such that you get many many more features in an AVR for not much more money. However, these features may be totally worthless to you. I went with an AVR for my stereo system and these are the features that swayed my decision in that direction:

1) Will you use a subwoofer? -
While a typical stereo receiver has a subwoofer output, there is absolutely no bass management - the receiver is sending full range signal to your speakers and full range signal to your subwoofer. If you are running bookshelf speakers, it is nice if you can save them from trying to reproduce below ~80Hz.
The AVR will eliminate the low frequencies from the speakers and the high frequencies from the sub and the rate of rolloff is balanced between the two.

2) Would you like to put a second set of speakers out on the deck or in another room? -
Most AVR's offer a "zone b" feature where you can sacrifice a couple of surround speakers and hook up another pair of speakers. You have separate controls of the source and volume for the second pair of speakers via the remote control.

3) How good are your room acoustics? -
Most AVR's offer an EQ system which measures your room and compensates for peaks and valleys in the frequency response. In a good room this doesn't matter. In a poor room, it will help. In my case I wasn't sure how good my room was, but I knew treatments were out of the picture (WAF), so I played it safe by getting an AVR.

4) How much power do you need? -
Because an AVR is designed to power 5 or 7 speakers simultaneously, if you use it for only 2 channels, you end up with extra dynamic headroom. Does it matter? That depends on the efficiency of your speakers and how loud you listen.

So look at the price difference (I suggest looking at accessories4less for the best prices on Onkyo and Marantz refurbs, but suspect you are already there) and whether the factors above apply to you before you make a decision.

 

[GranteedEV]

My recommendation for Two Channel stereo would be


1 Emotiva ERC-1 CD Player
1 Emotiva USP-1 or Parasound 2100 Preamplifier
1 Pair Behringer 3031A

1) If I get the axiom M22's speakers, are they good enough already or will I need a subwoofer to go with it? I am not really in need of intense bass or anything.

Musical content can extend as low as 27hz. The Axiom M22 has frequency response roughly down to around 60hz. You may hear some bass down to around 50hz but that will be less emphasized. Without a subwoofer you will miss roughly a a bit more than 1 octave. Whether that makes a difference to you is a good question. Personally I like to not "miss anything". It's less a matter of having a sub that will make mid bass slam harder and more a matter of just covering all the musical content I can.
Also, being a ported design, the bass from around 60-100hz probably may not sound as tight as if it were crossed over to a subwoofer at 80z.

Still, this is all just nitpicking. 60hz extension is very respectable and you should get 90% of most music. For a passive speaker with a similar slim profile I'd consider the Ascend CMT-340 and of course my recommendation is above.

 

[zumbo]

Well worth the extra money, if you are willing to bump-up the budget.
http://www.yawaonline.com/mb-quart-qls530-65quot-2way-quotsquot-line-bookshelf-speaker530652.html

Stereo receiver with bass management, and a sub-out:
http://www.outlawaudio.com/products/rr2150.html

 

[kaungsel]

accessories4less sells these products for cheap because they have been refurbished right? does it mean these products are going to break easily or i should be fine?

 

[PearlcorderS701]

I'll take the other side of this issue.
I don't disagree with anything Pearlcorder has said, but there are some counter-arguments to consider.
The economies of scale and popularity of AVR's is such that you get many many more features in an AVR for not much more money. However, these features may be totally worthless to you. I went with an AVR for my stereo system and these are the features that swayed my decision in that direction:

1) Will you use a subwoofer? -
While a typical stereo receiver has a subwoofer output, there is absolutely no bass management - the receiver is sending full range signal to your speakers and full range signal to your subwoofer. If you are running bookshelf speakers, it is nice if you can save them from trying to reproduce below ~80Hz.
The AVR will eliminate the low frequencies from the speakers and the high frequencies from the sub and the rate of rolloff is balanced between the two.

I totally understand this concern, and your opinion is valid -- however, there are stereo receivers that offer subwoofer outs such as my 8555 and the Outlaw, supposedly; although the concept of "bass management" is sketchy with these units...

2) Would you like to put a second set of speakers out on the deck or in another room? -
Most AVR's offer a "zone b" feature where you can sacrifice a couple of surround speakers and hook up another pair of speakers. You have separate controls of the source and volume for the second pair of speakers via the remote control.

Stereo receivers have a second bank of speaker terminals for a "zone" outside of the main.

3) How good are your room acoustics? -
Most AVR's offer an EQ system which measures your room and compensates for peaks and valleys in the frequency response. In a good room this doesn't matter. In a poor room, it will help. In my case I wasn't sure how good my room was, but I knew treatments were out of the picture (WAF), so I played it safe by getting an AVR.

Room treatments are a notable point -- but if he's really not into analyzing his room's boundaries and all that, trying to find nulls and peaks and such, I think a piece of gear dedicated to really music listening solely would be better than a surround AVR.

4) How much power do you need? -
Because an AVR is designed to power 5 or 7 speakers simultaneously, if you use it for only 2 channels, you end up with extra dynamic headroom. Does it matter? That depends on the efficiency of your speakers and how loud you listen.

Most AVR companies don't list or specify their products' output in all channels driven verbage, and that really wouldn't be ideal for music listening anyway in my opinion (that is, sending music through five, six or seven channels) -- I still think a stereo device of some kind with good, solid RMS power per two channels is the way to go here.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

1) If I get the axiom M22's speakers, are they good enough already or will I need a subwoofer to go with it? I am not really in need of intense bass or anything.

Then you don't necessarily "need" a sub -- I am not running a sub, and I have oldish Polk bookshelves; once music is pumping through your speakers as a full-range, full-blown signal, you'll get plenty of punch for stereo music without a sub through fairly large speakers (whether they are bookshelves or towers).

Could a subwoofer help? Sure -- I don't think it's necessary when we're talking music only applications.

Home Theater? No contest, or question.

2) I mmost likely don't need a second set on speakers in a different room.

Don't worry about "zone 2" features then -- as I stated in the last post, stereo receivers boast a second bank of speaker terminals on the back anyway for connecting a second pair of stereo speakers, and these can be run in another room if you like.

3) What do you mean by my room's acoustics? I have no idea how to measure it lol

This is getting into things that are too thick and heavy for you right now -- in my opinion, don't worry about "measuring" your room's "acoustics" for a music listening area, especially if it's going to be used casually.

The price difference is about $220 between the marantz and Onkyo stereo amp

You mean the Marantz surround receiver is 220 more than the Onkyo 8555? If you don't need home theater features, go with the stereo receiver, or the other two channel recommendations made here by me or others -- i.e. the Emotiva preamp paired with a stereo power amp or any of the plethora of integrated amps that are out there...

 

[GranteedEV]

accessories4less sells these products for cheap because they have been refurbished right? does it mean these products are going to break easily or i should be fine?

factory refurbished means it's been tested to be good as new however it may have scratches